PT vs. OT vs. ST (in any combination) debates are not allowed in the New Movies forums. Discussions that descend into OT/PT/ST bashing/gushing will be subject to Mod action. Consider this your warning.

I've seen discussions and arguments here about whether Disney has free reign to do whatever it wants with the ST and Spin-offs or whether the sales agreement had some general guidelines set up by GL that Disney must follow. The following article doesn't settle the issue as a contractual matter, but it does seem to make clear that Kathleen Kennedy is at least purposefully choosing to follow some pretty specific rules stipulated by GL for how the ST and the Spin-offs will interact and relate to one another.

Here's what Kennedy says: "George was so clear as to how that works. The canon that he created was the Star Wars saga. Right now, Episode VII falls within that canon. The spin-off movies, or we may come up with some other way to call those films, they exist within that vast universe that he created. There is no attempt being made to carry characters (from the standalone films) in and out of the saga episodes. Consequently, from the creative standpoint, it's a roadmap that George made pretty clear."

It seems to me that if Kennedy intends to follow GL's rules for how the Spin-offs relate to the ST films, then when it comes to the more important issue of what the content of the ST should be, she also intends to follow the general outlines the GL gave them for the ST and that she simply will not allow Abrams, Kasdan, etc. to stray to far from GL's general conception of what should occur in the ST.

(My bet is that Disney is contractually obligated to follow GL's outline for the ST (and that they are prevented from doing some things like making changes to 1 through 6 or remaking the films, etc). I think Iger's comment that Disney's has ultimate creative control was meant to mean that GL can't come in and say: "I don't like this or that, so this needs to be redone." So, my impression of the agreement is that Disney can't stray from GL's outlines, but at the same time, GL has no say over how the films are made -- cinematography, acting, dialogue, or any other aspect not specifically addressed in his outlines. Disney gets total control of all that. Again, this is just my guess about their contractual arrangement, but it does seem, if this article is accurate, that Kennedy intends to stay true to the agreement as GL has described it -- that at least the ST must follow his general vision and the spin-offs can't alter or affect that general story.)

Interested to hear what the rest of you think or if you've heard any news that contradicts what Kennedy's quote seems to imply.

It seems to me that if Kennedy intends to follow GL's rules for how the Spin-offs relate to the ST films, then when it comes to the more important issue of what the content of the ST should be, she also intends to follow the general outlines the GL gave them for the ST and that she simply will not allow Abrams, Kasdan, etc. to stray to far from GL's general conception of what should occur in the ST.

I think Iger's comment that Disney's has ultimate creative control was meant to mean that GL can't come in and say: "I don't like this or that, so this needs to be redone."

I think it just means that Disney, as the owner, has creative control over the property. And I'm not seeing them ignore any suggestions that George makes, specially after the whole speech about "George is Star Wars, etc, etc..."

but it does seem, if this article is accurate, that Kennedy intends to stay true to the agreement as GL has described it -- that at least the ST must follow his general vision and the spin-offs can't alter or affect that general story.

I think that Disney/LFL's immediate plans will be to follow all the material that George sold them. That is the ST treatments and his ideas for spinoffs. He said that he sold Disney "enough material to make Star Wars for the next 100 years."

Part of those immediate plans include 2 or 3 spinoffs, depending on who you read. At least one of the spinoffs will be Boba Fett and I believe his movie will tie into the unreleased Underworld TV show that George couldn't shoot due to the expense. I read that there were 50 or a 100 scripts completed. So I think that will be the natural progression along with another spinoff movie of course.

As for whether or not Disney SHOULD follow the ideas of Lucas I say "ABSOLUTELY!" Lucas is without a doubt in my mind a genius. The fact that there are some flaws with the whole saga 1-6 is a testament NOT to a poor filmmaker but perhaps to an Indie filmmaker who didn't have enough feedback from other sources. I don't blame or bash George like so many love to do. I love the PT and think the flaws are minor. There are some things I would've done differently. And George is notorious for not being an actor's director.

However, SW is George's sandbox and he is now inviting many other gifted filmmakers into it. They'd be wise to adhere to all the things that made SW great, even if they don't execute all the ideas exactly the same way.

It seems to me that if Kennedy intends to follow GL's rules for how the Spin-offs relate to the ST films, then when it comes to the more important issue of what the content of the ST should be, she also intends to follow the general outlines the GL gave them for the ST and that she simply will not allow Abrams, Kasdan, etc. to stray to far from GL's general conception of what should occur in the ST.

(My bet is that Disney is contractually obligated to follow GL's outline for the ST (and that they are prevented from doing some things like making changes to 1 through 6 or remaking the films, etc). I think Iger's comment that Disney's has ultimate creative control was meant to mean that GL can't come in and say: "I don't like this or that, so this needs to be redone." So, my impression of the agreement is that Disney can't stray from GL's outlines, but at the same time, GL has no say over how the films are made -- cinematography, acting, dialogue, or any other aspect not specifically addressed in his outlines. Disney gets total control of all that. Again, this is just my guess about their contractual arrangement, but it does seem, if this article is accurate, that Kennedy intends to stay true to the agreement as GL has described it -- that at least the ST must follow his general vision and the spin-offs can't alter or affect that general story.)

This is a bit reassuring. The fact that the importance of the current canon is stressed gives me hope that we won't see Episode VII: Return of Vader or anything like that. I'm very curious as to what he envisioned, due to the denial of the ST for so long, but if there's one person who could continue the story, it's him.

I can also understand the explanation behind the spin-off movies; casual fans might be confused by changes in the plot of the main movies that only occurred in these side-stories. That makes it more likely that we'll see something between the ROTS-ANH period to avoid confusion (again, Boba Fett, Yoda, Obi-Wan, etc.).

As for whether or not Disney SHOULD follow the ideas of Lucas I say "ABSOLUTELY!" Lucas is without a doubt in my mind a genius. The fact that there are some flaws with the whole saga 1-6 is a testament NOT to a poor filmmaker but perhaps to an Indie filmmaker who didn't have enough feedback from other sources. I don't blame or bash George like so many love to do. I love the PT and think the flaws are minor. There are some things I would've done differently. And George is notorious for not being an actor's director.

However, SW is George's sandbox and he is now inviting many other gifted filmmakers into it. They'd be wise to adhere to all the things that made SW great, even if they don't execute all the ideas exactly the same way.

George is the man with the vision, and like you said, Disney provides a larger platform to make that happen. With Disney's resources, I hope to see some abandoned Star Wars projects revived (specifically the TV series).

I honestly think that he'll have limited input. He sold up and Disney can do whatever they want despite owning LFL. They can take the scripts, get LFL to make them - but they pull the strings. Often when properties are intellectually bought by corporations (TV Shows, Scripts, franchises) they often make changes despite the context of outlines. Star Wars had changed and the Mouse knew that. Either way, Disney said they wanted to get SW back to how it was. So where does that bridge the gap between the collaborative input of hundreds of people in the OT to bring that vision to life with different directors calling the shots opposed to the Lucas "approved" PT where he called the shots on almost every aspect of production and the "Yes Men" of LFL/ILM?

Did Disney see the backlash of the PT and the SE's. Of course they did. Lucas will be a creative consultant - but things can all change during pre-production as well as post.

Did Disney see the backlash of the PT and the SE's. Of course they did.

I'm sure they give more importance to the successful box office and home video sales of those movies.

Granted - every company is in it for profit, but they have to offer a quality service and product to make that profit.

So you are saying Disney aren't looking at the importance of making quality sequels to a gigantic franchise and are all about the financial side despite a very vocal fan base? If that was the case then why would they spend the money they did accquiring the biggest franchise and not actually giving the ST a budget?This isn't Lucas using his own fortune to make the films he wants to make (e.g: 1999-2005) by his guidelines/technical time frames without any quality assurance.

Disney/LFL knows they have to get it right as they said when the acquisition took place they were aiming to get Star Wars back to how it was - and they hadn't even mentioned the effects at that point.

If LFL/Disney don't get it right then they won't recoup from their idealogical 'finance only' interest.

So you are saying Disney aren't looking at the importance of making quality sequels to a gigantic franchise and are all about the financial side despite a very vocal fan base?

No, I'm saying that the huge success meant that the audience in general was happy and the movies were at the same time profitable for the company, despite the vocal group of people who keeps criticizing the movies/changes/etc...

Disney/LFL knows they have to get it right as they said when the acquisition took place they were aiming to get Star Wars back to how it was - and they hadn't even mentioned the effects at that point.

'back to how it was' meaning...?

Well let's look at the prequels. I say this as I really enjoyed TPM at first because it was Star Wars. I enjoyed AOTC because it was Star Wars and then after the third viewing it all soured. And I lived to see the saga come to it's conclusion. So as a look back i'm saying it as I saw it from others and not influenced by outsiders of my own bubble. This is partly a reflection in contrast and comparison to the OT also. Not the side of just the die hard fans from Generation X/Class of '77 - but as a whole. First off we'll start with the public or what some would call "the outside world" for those fans who feel they have a sense of entitlement. Okay...

The Phantom Menace was the most anticipated film of the latter 20th century and not only had fans disliking/hating it but film critics, general cinemagoers, television stations playing on the dismay of how how many didn't see the fuss of the build up, documentaries, Youtube videos (even going back that far), online reviews, celebrities. Despite it's financial success - the anticipation of it made people flock to the cinema. It didn't last a huge amount of time at the cinema. People were saying "What happened to Star Wars?". Some liked/loved it - not on the same level of it's dislike. It was over-sold in promotion and cross promotion with every company wanting to licence it on a product. It made Ghostbusters II look like Ben Hur. This was Lucas' take - not the creative vision of many like production of the OT. I'll quote a line from The People Vs George Lucas...

"We asked for more Star Wars. But we didn't ask for good Star Wars"...

Attack of the Clones - another poorly written story, bad acting, some dodgy compositing and no real strong connection between portrayal and story and awful dialogue. It was that good that box office receipts weren't the best either in comparison.

Revenge of the Sith - people flocked to see if it picked up the pace being the conclusive part of the saga. More dodgy performances, some more poor compositing and one rushed film with some more bad acting. It faired a lot better than the previous two episodes but didn't feel right for a larger number of people.

Despite it having it's fans on both levels because it has a Star Wars logo attached to it - they were very poor films. Not horrendous - but there was no real thought behind them opposed to an artistic preference by Lucas. Most of all - they were made as independent features and outside of the bubble. Lucas funded with only Fox with distribution rights. He never had to answer to anybody and made those who worked for his companies answer to him. He never had a studio say that they didn't like it. He put out a product without thought and just his vision.

Hence why there was no quality assurance.

If you compare it to the people they have working on the ST, it is going back to the way it was. Independent people working by little guidelines, but given the open field to see what they can come up with like the OT and not just a company of "Yes" men. Not Lucas walking around with an "Approved" stamp or a Sharpie making alterations to his tastes whilst visiting ILM. Lucas is a technical director with a vision, not a fully hands on director like his peers.

That is where the prequels failed. It was a one man show.

ANH - Fox pulled the strings and massive editing changes straight through to just before release. Lucas wasn't happy - but look what happenned...
ESB - It was all Kersh's baby (Hailed as one of the greatest sequels of all time and best of the saga)
ROTJ - Marquand's film with GL handling second unit and altering things in the process but not completely changed by GL (considered the weakest of the trilogy)

The PT - Lucas' money, direction, full control.

But most of all relating to the business of this thread "How much influence will on the ST" - so limited influence. They had to figure out a new story by Lucas' ideas. it was given to the hands of two very talented writers and one very talented director who knows how to work with actors to deliver the best possible results but giving the cast the best possible freedom to work with the given script.

Back to how it used to be - ESB was totally out of his hands but he put up the money from bank loans and all Kershner's work where GL was behind the scenes as an executive producer but keeping an eye on what was happening with his money. That is what they are doing with the ST and not George's money involved. He is just a creative consultant. Nothing more.

So i'll revert back to the year 2000 when this scene from Spaced spoke to so many fans on many levels because a kid went in excited to buy a Jar Jar doll... And it was the talk of many older fans when we went to the pub the following night.

What I'm hoping is that Disney takes Lucas' treatments, whatever they are, as an outline bad then makes:

1. Fun movies. Nothing pretentious, nothing overly heavy on Terms Used in English Class: theme, tone, imagery, etc. Nothing I have to analyze while I'm watching. Nothing I have to take too seriously. Quoting another fun movie from the 80s, an ounce of pretentiousness is worth a pound of manure.

2. Movies that are consistent with each other and the OT. Obviously consistent, not "it's consistent if you look at it from this angle and accept this explanation."

Disney/LFL knows they have to get it right as they said when the acquisition took place they were aiming to get Star Wars back to how it was - and they hadn't even mentioned the effects at that point.

'back to how it was' meaning...?

Well let's look at the prequels. I say this as I really enjoyed TPM at first because it was Star Wars. I enjoyed AOTC because it was Star Wars and then after the third viewing it all soured. And I lived to see the saga come to it's conclusion. So as a look back i'm saying it as I saw it from others and not influenced by outsiders of my own bubble. This is partly a reflection in contrast and comparison to the OT also. Not the side of just the die hard fans from Generation X/Class of '77 - but as a whole. First off we'll start with the public or what some would call "the outside world" for those fans who feel they have a sense of entitlement. Okay...

The Phantom Menace was the most anticipated film of the latter 20th century and not only had fans disliking/hating it but film critics, general cinemagoers, television stations playing on the dismay of how how many didn't see the fuss of the build up, documentaries, Youtube videos (even going back that far), online reviews, celebrities. Despite it's financial success - the anticipation of it made people flock to the cinema. It didn't last a huge amount of time at the cinema. People were saying "What happened to Star Wars?". Some liked/loved it - not on the same level of it's dislike. It was over-sold in promotion and cross promotion with every company wanting to licence it on a product. It made Ghostbusters II look like Ben Hur. This was Lucas' take - not the creative vision of many like production of the OT. I'll quote a line from The People Vs George Lucas...

"We asked for more Star Wars. But we didn't ask for good Star Wars"...

Attack of the Clones - another poorly written story, bad acting, some dodgy compositing and no real strong connection between portrayal and story and awful dialogue. It was that good that box office receipts weren't the best either in comparison.

Revenge of the Sith - people flocked to see if it picked up the pace being the conclusive part of the saga. More dodgy performances, some more poor compositing and one rushed film with some more bad acting. It faired a lot better than the previous two episodes but didn't feel right for a larger number of people.

Despite it having it's fans on both levels because it has a Star Wars logo attached to it - they were very poor films. Not horrendous - but there was no real thought behind them opposed to an artistic preference by Lucas. Most of all - they were made as independent features and outside of the bubble. Lucas funded with only Fox with distribution rights. He never had to answer to anybody and made those who worked for his companies answer to him. He never had a studio say that they didn't like it. He put out a product without thought and just his vision.

Hence why there was no quality assurance.

If you compare it to the people they have working on the ST, it is going back to the way it was. Independent people working by little guidelines, but given the open field to see what they can come up with like the OT and not just a company of "Yes" men. Not Lucas walking around with an "Approved" stamp or a Sharpie making alterations to his tastes whilst visiting ILM. Lucas is a technical director with a vision, not a fully hands on director like his peers.

That is where the prequels failed. It was a one man show.

ANH - Fox pulled the strings and massive editing changes straight through to just before release. Lucas wasn't happy - but look what happenned...
ESB - It was all Kersh's baby (Hailed as one of the greatest sequels of all time and best of the saga)
ROTJ - Marquand's film with GL handling second unit and altering things in the process but not completely changed by GL (considered the weakest of the trilogy)

The PT - Lucas' money, direction, full control.

But most of all relating to the business of this thread "How much influence will on the ST" - so limited influence. They had to figure out a new story by Lucas' ideas. it was given to the hands of two very talented writers and one very talented director who knows how to work with actors to deliver the best possible results but giving the cast the best possible freedom to work with the given script.

Back to how it used to be - ESB was totally out of his hands but he put up the money from bank loans and all Kershner's work where GL was behind the scenes as an executive producer but keeping an eye on what was happening with his money. That is what they are doing with the ST and not George's money involved. He is just a creative consultant. Nothing more.

So i'll revert back to the year 2000 when this scene from Spaced spoke to so many fans on many levels because a kid went in excited to buy a Jar Jar doll... And it was the talk of many older fans when we went to the pub the following night.

I think Disney would be crazy not to give GL a major amount of input, if nothing more than Lucas turning around and complaining to the public that Disney completely ignored him. Add in the multitude of other things that can go wrong in this formula, and I think Lucas will have a decent amount of pull, even if its just for story elements and pieces of the universe that he wants in there.

Regarding the above post, I always assumed that it would be some of both. The Civil War would still linger, and that would be at the beginning of Ep. 7 as a plot point. However, a new villain, whether part of the Imperial hierarchy or not, would be needed at some point. You can't have three movies of chasing after ghosts or rogue warlords; that's more EU or spin-off territory.